Many Immigration Patriots Poised To Win House Races
Print Friendly and PDF

In an interview with Univision's fawning Eddie "Piolin" Sotelo, President Obama told Hispanics that they needed to "punish our enemies." [Transcript of President Barack Obama with Univision, LA Times, October 25, 2010]

Who are these enemies?

Obama's candidates: Republican candidates who are

"politicizing the [immigration] issue, who are supportive of the Arizona law, who talk only about border security but aren't willing to talk about the other aspects of this, who don't support the Dream Act, who are out there engaging in rhetoric that is divisive and damaging that — those aren't the kinds of folks who represent our core American values."

Obama told the Univision host that the fate of "comprehensive immigration reform" a.k.a. amnesty lay in the coming elections.

If this is the case, Obama is in trouble in the House. Patriotic immigration reformers are poised to unseat numerous Democrats on the immigration issue, and many Democrats are trying to run to the Right on the issue (as they did, albeit with little MainStream Media comment, in 2008).

Here are a few of the most important races.

  • Arizona 1, 5, 7: Republicans Paul Gosar,) David Schweikert, and Jesse Kelly vs. Democrats Ann Kirkpatrick, Harry Mitchell, and Gabrielle Giffords.

In 2006 and 2008, Democrats made huge gains in Arizona. The defeats of immigration patriots J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf at the hands of Harry Mitchell and Gabrielle Giffords respectively were touted by MSM immigration enthusiasts as proof that voters supported liberal immigration laws.

Of course, Mitchell and Giffords actually pretended to support border control and interior enforcement, but this was intentionally ignored.

Now, with three quarters of Arizonans supporting SB 1070, this argument becomes incredibly difficult to make. White Democrats in the state are desperately running away from Obama on immigration. Mitchell and Giffords, along with freshman Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick, all very vocally attacked Obama's lawsuit against Arizona and the calls for boycotts. All pretend to stand tough on border security.

Because in this Congress the Democrats have managed to block pretty much any votes on immigration, most freshman have not had much of a chance actually to do anything bad—unless they co-sponsored bills, which Kirkpatrick and Mitchell wisely avoided.

Giffords however, did co-sponsor the Flake-Guitierrez STRIVE Amnesty. And she attempted to destroy E-Verify completely with the New Employment Verification Act.                                 

Furthermore, if these Democrats truly opposed Obama's lawsuit against SB1070, they could have co-sponsored Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn's CLEAR Act, which confirms the inherent authority of states to enforce immigration law.

All of these Democrats are now under fire from immigration patriot Republican opponents: Jesse Kelly, Paul Gosar, and David Schweikert. All three candidates answered Numbers USA's survey perfectly, and are making support for SB 1070 the focus of their campaigns. Most polls and analysts show them with small leads over the Democrats.

Perhaps the most important candidate of the three: Jesse Kelly who defeated the John McCain/Jeff Flake based establishment candidate in the primary with the support of Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, Tom Tancredo, and Joe Arpaio and is making border security the main focus of his campaign. Because Kelly is in a border district and he defeated the McCain candidate, he could become a leader on the issue.

Arizona is Ground Zero of the immigration debate. It would be a huge statement if it elected serious immigration patriots in Congress.

  • Arizona 7: Ruth McClung (R) vs. Raúl Grijalva (D)

Unlike Mitchell, Kirkpatrick, and Giffords, Raúl Grijalva makes absolutely no attempt even to pretend to support border security. As co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and vice-chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Grijalva is one of the loudest and most obnoxious Reconquista congressmen in the country, with a 0% F- Grade from Numbers USA. Most notoriously, he called for boycotting his own state over SB 1070 telling Keith Olbermann:

"We're asking …civic, religious, labor, Latino, organizations of color to refrain from using Arizona as a convention site, to refrain from spending their dollars in the state of Arizona until Arizona turns the clock forward instead of backwards and joins the rest of the union."

[Raul Grijalva Urges Boycott of Arizona, Stephen Lemons, Phoenix New Times, April 21, 2010]

Arizona's seventh district is over 50% Hispanic and Grijalva was long considered safe. But now most analysts are saying it's a toss-up, against Ruth McClung, a Republican businesswoman.

For an immigration reform patriot, McClung is not much to write home about. She will not endorse SB 1070, at least its current form, her platform calls for an expanded guest worker program and for some sort of amnesty program under which illegals get an "opportunity card" that will "allow them to stay in this country." [America's sovereignty, borders, and immigration, Ruth McClung for Congress, June 21, 2010] Ominously, she is backed by Grover Norquist.

Still, a white Republican taking down one of the most pro-amnesty Hispanic Congressmen would be a huge statement.

  • Pennsylvania 11: Lou Barletta (R) vs. Paul Kanjorski (D)

The most disappointing race of 2008 (John McCain didn't count) was Lou Barletta's getting edged out by Paul Kanjorski.

Barletta had become a hero to patriotic immigration reformers across America when he signed the Illegal Immigration Relief Act as mayor of Hazleton, PA. The Act cracked down on employers and landlords of illegal aliens and prompted lawsuits by MALDEF, the ACLU, and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund. (Unfortunately, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals just overturned the law. It's being appealed.)

Hazleton, as well as Pennsylvania's 11th District, is overwhelmingly Democratic. But Barletta showed that immigration control was a winner when he won not just the GOP mayoralty nomination, but also the Democratic nomination, as a write-in

Kanjorski has a terrible record on immigration with an F- from Numbers USA. However, since Barletta began eying the race, Kanjorski has kept a low profile and attempted to sound tough on immigration. This enabled the MSM to run headlines like On illegal immigration, Kanjorski, Barletta agree, By Borys Krawczeniuk, The (Wilkes-Barre, Pa.) Citizen's Voice, October 6, 2008. [Not online]

Most political analysts think that Barletta will manage to edge out Kanjorski. If elected Barletta will immediately become one of the most prominent immigration patriot leaders in Congress.

  • Idaho 1: Raul Labrador (R) vs. Walt Minnick (D).

Republicans are not always the strongest immigration patriots. In Idaho, incumbent Democrat Walt Minnick has a pretty good record on immigration co-sponsoring the SAVE Act and expanded E-Verify. When given Numbers USA's survey, he answered in favor of reducing legal and illegal immigration (though not favoring ending birthright citizenship.)

Minnick is up against Puerto Rican immigration lawyer, Republican Raul Labrador.

Labrador's platform states:

"Massive police round-ups are both frightening and expensive. And I fear it would take too long...To help speed-up the process, I would be willing to offer illegals an incentive to come forward: should they do so willingly and in some reasonable time-frame – we would guarantee them first consideration by the state department to return legally... While that is happening, we need to greatly streamline our guest worker program, particularly for the agricultural sector. Farmers wishing to hire workers should be able to do so in a straight-forward, fairly simple manner."

Labrador claims that "I believe my background in immigration law, my expertise on the complexities of this problem uniquely qualify me to help find real, lasting solutions to this crisis". He says working as an immigration attorney gave him "great respect for the law." [Raul Labrador's Position on Illegal Immigration, Labrador for Congress, August 24, 2010]

Minnick's campaign is running two ads targeting Labrador's pro-amnesty work as an immigration attorney and the proprietor of, saying "Illegal immigration is good business for Raul Labrador." [Walt Minnick's ad slams Raul Labrador's work in immigration law, Idaho Statesman, September 17, 2010]

This is making the Open Borders left nuts—with Frank Sharry's America's Voice running the headline "Idaho Democrat, Walt Minnick, Giving Latino Opponent the Tancredo Treatment" that tries to tie Minnick to (of all people) Dr. John Tanton.

The Daily Kos complained:

"With the Latino demographic growing at over three times that of Anglos, it's clear that Idaho's days as a lily white enclave are finished. His state is changing, and changing in a way that will help his future political endeavors—if he could simply resist the urge to be a bigot. Yet Minnick has decided, for no obvious reason, to run a hateful campaign. Asshole."

[ID-01:-Walt-Minnick-(D),-bigoted-ass, Daily Kos, September 18, 2010]

In fact, of course, there is a glaring "obvious reason" why Minnick decided to be a patriot. White Idahoans still make up over 91% of the population of Minnick's district. They never voted to make their days as a "lily white enclave finished". And they are not keen on attorneys who helped bring forth these unwanted changes.

  • Ohio 18: Bob Gibbs (R) vs. Zack Space (D)

Like Idaho's Minnick, Ohio 18's Zack Space portrays himself as being tough on immigration. But he has absolutely no credibility. Space epitomizes the blue dog phony conservative Democrat who pretends to be tough on immigration, but surreptitiously works to undermine immigration enforcement.

Space's campaign website proclaims:

"First and foremost, we must strengthen our borders and stop the massive influx of illegal immigrants coming into America, and [Space] cosponsored bills that would do just that, including the Secure America through Verification and Enforcement Act before the House of Representatives."

Yet Space fails to mention that he blocked the SAVE Act from coming to a vote by refusing to sign the discharge petition.

During debates over Obamacare, Space introduced an Amendment to bar illegal aliens from getting affordability credits, and then gloated in a press release:

"Putting his foot down to make sure that proposed healthcare reform legislation does not include illegal immigrants, Congressman Zack Space (OH-18) today successfully passed an amendment that excludes illegal immigrants from any benefit in the health care legislation currently before Congress."

[UPDATE: Space Amendment Passes, Zack Space, July 31, 2010]

What Space did not mention is that his Amendment was phony because it included no verification mechanism. The day before, Nathan Deal (R-GA) introduced an Amendment that did include verification, and Space voted against it.

After this episode, I wrote on VDARE.COM:

"Despite all the talk about Blue Dog Democrats running the show, when push comes to shove, with the exception of a few principled Democrats like Heath Shuler, most will bow down to Pelosi and the Hispanic Caucus. Hopefully if these double dealings get further exposed, these Democrats in conservative districts will decide getting reelected is more important than pleasing their party leadership—or they may be replaced by immigration reform patriots."

[More Obama Care for Illegal Aliens, August 7, 2009]

Space is indeed being challenged by an immigration reform patriot, State Senator Bob Gibbs. Gibbs filled out Numbers USA's survey perfectly. His platform states:

"If I am elected to Congress I will do everything within my power to ensure our government protects our borders and enforce our immigration laws. I absolutely oppose amnesty and will oppose any legislation that would try to subvert our current immigration policies. I am also against using any government subsidies for any purposes related to illegal immigration."

However, Gibbs has barely mentioned immigration on the campaign trail or in any of his ads. Meanwhile, the Democratic Congressional Committee is running ads attacking Gibbs, support for NAFTA over a map of Mexico and an empty America.

Gibbs could have sunk Space by exposing his hypocrisy on immigration. But he did not take the opportunity.

This race is viewed as a toss-up by most political observers. If Gibbs loses, it will be his fault for not using the immigration issue.

  • Finally—The One Issue No One Is Running On—Legal Immigration

Note something that I have not mentioned in this entire piece: legal immigration.

This is because even the best candidates have been completely silent on the issue—even when they answer Numbers USA's survey indicating support for reducing legal immigration.

It's is a huge disappointment, which I will discuss in depth after the election.

Still, the fact that illegal immigration is becoming the centerpiece of numerous important races is encouraging.

First priority in the 112th Congress: pressuring the freshmen conservatives to step up and introduce an anti-unemployment legal immigration moratorium.

"Washington Watcher" [email him] is an anonymous source Inside The Beltway.

Print Friendly and PDF